|
It also seems that if you assume either the Father or the Mother is lying, you don't have enough information to compile a complete drink list, even discounting the conflicting information.
|
#
¿
May 31, 2013 03:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 09:15 |
|
|
In this case, the overall numerical results don't favour betray, especially if you want to get everyone out. There are a few snags though: As Phi says, one cant be sure if anyone is really going to betray or ally. From a self defense standpoint, it might be more prudent to avoid losing BP. Even if it doesnt take one down to 0 on the first go, it leaves one open to a later betrayal. If people start getting BP now it would be harder to kill them in the future. The higher one's BP gets the more it takes to bring one down to death level - unless they change the ambidex game later. And if 999 is any indication, there definitely may be people who want to kill. So far very little has been revealed and aside from a door decision which had little impact. Luna could just be acting right now, for example, much like Ace had a quite dramatic character shift. A person might be able to make an excuse for the betrayal as well - "I panicked, I was afraid, etc" - though it might be flimsy. All it takes is a seed of distrust or fear for one to want to choose the selfish option in the prisoners dilemma, even if one isn't inherently selfish. For the first one though I still think its safer to choose Ally though, yeah. We'll see how that pans out though.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2013 22:59
|
|
|
tiistai posted:This scene would have been perfect if I didn't have an irrational hatred towards the Chinese Room being taken seriously. Same with Schrödinger's cat. I'm curious as to your thoughts on it! Personally I find it interesting that the whole point of the Chinese Room Argument (In John Searle's original paper) in the essay it came from was to show that AI can never understand natural language and thus strong/sentient AI is not possible - the crux of it being that "I could run a program for Chinese without thereby coming to understand Chinese." - thus suggesting that programming for Chinese does not lead to an understanding of Chinese. There's a gap between how and why a native speaker understands Chinese and how the program goes about it. It's however interesting that the Chinese Room comes up in a scenario where there IS intelligent AI, thus meaning the Chinese room argument fails. Finally, the pain thing gave me shades of Wittgenstein (as much as it sounds pretentious to say so) - and how talking about pain is kind of meaningless when it comes to other people. What does pain even mean to a cockney robot! Is it really pain, or an analogue? We probably cant even talk about it - but that makes the exchange interesting still (if it's purpose driven or sensation driven). Either way, this section and the accent was awesome! VVVVVV Oh, that makes some more sense. So to complete the analogy the mainframe is the entity that 'writes' the Chinese translation books, by providing instruction on the meaning behind words and concepts and how to interact with humans. The Golem can only 'read the books' as it were - having limited learning/autonomy capacities but not a true grasp of natural language, whereas the mainframe and Zero III could be a Strong/Full AI. PlaceholderPigeon fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2013 23:25
|
|
|
Kgummy posted:I've heard of the Chinese Room Argument used in terms of philosophy. Basically stuff relating to consciousness and minds/the minds of others. So it's not entirely out of place. And it's probably a big part of why the game is bringing it up. Yeah, the crux of the Chinese room argument is that understanding natural language is something that only a human can do and that it cannot be programmed for. There being a core difference between being able to hold a conversation in a language one doesn't understand via following instruction and actually understanding what a particular word means in relation to the world or our perceptions. (But assuming the Robotic Player is a Strong AI, then they would understand langage anyways!) Also significant is the relation between the Chinese Room argument and the Turing Test, since both deal with the idea of 'holding a conversation' and what it means to be a sentient AI. If we're dealing with someone being a robot, I imagine the latter's going to show up! I'm going to hazard a guess that there's going to be one of those coincidental conversation things like 999's Ice-9/Titanic/Crystals/Alice chain that leads to something substantial in the later game, if it concerns a robotic player. Also: Can the Robotic Player die via the poison in the bracelet when they reach 0 BP? And due to this, do their win or loss condition change? I wonder... As for my guess on the robot, Luna or Tenmyouji are my two guesses. Luna's nondescript and the change would be a interesting twist, and an old looking robot seems like an interesting throwoff to me. Edit: Yeah, that's true - there's a lot of dualism/philosophy of mind stuff that is hinted at by the problem, and the hard problem of consciousness, etc. I suppose I'm partly doing the same thing as the robot is, musing because I'm bored. PlaceholderPigeon fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Jun 20, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2013 00:04
|
|
|
Yeah, in the end, arguments like Searle's Chinese Room sort of come down to "What do you think consciousness is?" and whether you think a sort of materialistic reductionism is possible generally puts you on one side or the other and its not very likely to come to a compromise. Since sort of what's implied by the argument is that conscious understanding of language is something different than merely working within the system of language, and there's something about the words having reference to actual things. Kangra: I also see that compilation you're mentioning has "What is it like to be a Bat?" Which is an essay I quite enjoy. Theres also an interesting essay on brain splitting and identity by Derek Parfit summarized here that's interesting too. PlaceholderPigeon fucked around with this message at 22:56 on Jun 21, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2013 08:49
|
|
|
Are the characters aware of the cameras? If they know about them and are actively considering avoiding incriminating exposure, then the fact that K checks his bracelet so obviously on camera makes me wonder. Sure, its a convenient anchor point and happens just around the time when K is coming back to meet Phi/Sigma, but why does he do that? It seems a bit staged. Normally I'd expect a person to check their watch before they start moving and when they have completed an action - so when he allegedly gave up on resuscitating Luna. Starting to move and reaching an arbitrary point on the journey and checking the time before moving again seems peculiar (though not impossible). I think he was attempting to make his story look more real by showing that time on purpose. Though, its also possible that it was just being used for the time context in a more innocent manner and this could still be purposeful PlaceholderPigeon fucked around with this message at 14:38 on Aug 19, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2013 14:30
|
|
|
namesake posted:Phi Knows Best. El Psi Congroo?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2013 20:53
|
|
|
Sheesh, Dio. Looking like maximum rear end in a top hat there. I personally think that from an 'explore all the branches' meta perspective, it doesn't doesn't hurt to go ally, because if Dio betrays, the game will assumingly just end right there - and we can probably just do the other choice. I realize this is heavily meta, but, if I was playing the game myself (I haven't actually played the game) and I knew I'd be able to resume from that spot, I would just give it a shot, and then Betray if that din't work out. Giving into Dio's dickish move is still pretty galling though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2013 20:24
|
|
|
Sentient Data posted:Idea for a new thread rule (a serious idea this time, not just said tongue-in-cheek) for cases like this (where we're at a choice and it seems like one (or both) might be a quick death): if the voted-on choice does lead to a quick death, no going back to that same choice and just picking the other outcome That seems to be a practical idea for building tension but an impractical idea for the flow of the LP as a whole. I think a reasonable compromise would be to treat it as a dead end and then have a vote on it like we had with the password psuedo-deadend. Besides, its a fun to go for all the death options you can in Choose Your own Adventures or things like this! So I'm voting Ally! All aboard the naive Sigma train!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
So that was a lot more fruitful then I expected. These plot locks are pretty interesting and I'm looking forward to seeing what resolves them. Maybe we're gonna get a cross path-thing going on, and - well, I wonder if Sigma's passing out in Security has something to do with things that happen in other paths (considering June had issues living beyond a certain point in time).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2013 08:56
|
|
|
So the Ally option is the one that goes forwards and the Betray is the game-over option? Quite a twisting of expectations there! Dio still a huge dick, as per expectation. Interestingly, nobody in game mentions that Sigma's just trying to avoid death. Even Sigma doesn't bring it up - saying "Sorry, I chose betray." rather than "You were going to loving kill me with that betray choice you selfish prick!"
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2013 15:12
|
|
|
I just looked back at the Ally results and it seems K has 9 points there - but it seems something prevents him from going? Because it looks like he could just leave in either branch, but he only leaves in the Betray one. Does the preservation of the medicine keep K inside then? Or I guess it might not have happened yet but still he could leave with Dio after the plot lock. PlaceholderPigeon fucked around with this message at 19:08 on Nov 11, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
Nidoking posted:
So..with a name like Six Sigmas, its really a high-pressure interview process for business execs! Featuring the Nonary Game - Supply Chain Management Edition!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
That Agricola reference was wholly unexpected! The little jokes in the phone were neat too.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2013 21:27
|
|
|
Those Apple and Banana people were pretty adorable! I guess now were actually getting into the morphogenic stuff - but whats exploding? Have we seen anything like that before, or is that the desert/warehouse area?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2013 22:23
|
|
|
Wasnt that a thing in Sigma's flashback/premonition moment?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2013 05:49
|
|
|
Well that was certainly unexpected. Now we get to see if Alice taunts us before we die in shame, hooray - or if there's another twist?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2014 11:23
|
|
|
At this point I think that I'd like to go with the deepest branch too - the Second Luna betray. If it ends in a Game Over, well, that clears up that! Maybe it's just that with no immediate branch 'switch' I'd like to clean them up from left to right. There's also no telling where we will find those plot keys too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Bifauxnen posted:Don't worry, we already know the perfect thing to say! What makes this interesting is that Alice's stated logic was right here; it seems like she came into this with a particular thought process and game strategy! Thus, I'm interested to see if Alice uses a different logic now that she's chosen Ally. I wonder if something happened to her; but it could only happen via some sort of field effect, probably. I briefly thought that the game expected you to choose ally first then come back and betray (thus making sure you KNEW Alice chose betray last time), but the writers couldn't bank on that - there's no reason why a person might not just be 'maximum rear end in a top hat Sigma' and go in betraying everyone from the get go - or at least, going along with Phi's advice. So that's out. It seems like this fork is there to trip your expectations up. I imagine if you had finished this path first and felt bad, went and Allied with Alice second - well, you might feel stupid when Alice gave you a dressing down for choosing Ally. e: Considering this branch introduces the prisoners dilemma, I wonder if this reflexive type 'Alice chooses the opposite of what you do' is something related to that. PlaceholderPigeon fucked around with this message at 01:25 on Feb 11, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
NeoNaoNeo posted:lol, this path with this betray was literally the very first thing I did in this game. Yeah, I meant 'might not just' but I typoed! Interesting that the scene changes and they take in that request. I always like when games play with the 'redo' aspect of such. I've seen it some other games and they've been neat (not gonna spoil which)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
If you pick Betray first then go back and Ally, do you get the same rock-paper-scissors section on the Ally side? Or something else?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
I'm voting to choose Ally because I'm a predictable person like this, even though it's likely Phi will jump out and call us a dumb-face.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
Now we get to see if Phi comes out and calls us dumb, yay! Interestingly, K kept his word, even though he could have just left if he had voted Betray and left.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
Hmm; assuming we go back and betray, perhaps Phi allies when we betray and that is the injustice she speaks of, thus leading to a kind of loop where Phi's action is motivated by our action which is motivated by Phi's action? Half of that happened with Alice - she allied when we betrayed - so it might happen here too?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 09:15 |
|
|
We....win? Prepare for Phi outrage! PlaceholderPigeon fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Mar 16, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2014 23:00
|
|